DracoEssentialis (talk | contribs) |
→Death of Carole Waugh: comment |
||
Line 197: | Line 197: | ||
::::*You have attempted to resolve the "situation" with Sarah, yet she has not responded in the manner in which you desire. Beating a dead horse here or on the article's talkpage has now gone beyond par. The community has determined in the AFD that the [[WP:NOTNEWS]] argument did not hold water in this regard. You have other options here. I'm sure there are thousands of individuals that would prefer to see an article removed from the encyclopedia, but there are also many disappointed people worldwide. I don't consider it wisdom for both you and your wife to essentially brow beat the closing administrator's decision, based on emotional pleas from your friends. Respectfully, it is apparent that there may be a conflict of interest here that you may wish to consider. Again, there are other options available to you. I recommend that you choose one of them. <font color="navy" face="Tahoma">[[User:Cindamuse|Cindy]]</font><font color="purple" face="Courier">([[User talk:Cindamuse#top|talk to me]])</font> 12:04, 5 September 2012 (UTC) |
::::*You have attempted to resolve the "situation" with Sarah, yet she has not responded in the manner in which you desire. Beating a dead horse here or on the article's talkpage has now gone beyond par. The community has determined in the AFD that the [[WP:NOTNEWS]] argument did not hold water in this regard. You have other options here. I'm sure there are thousands of individuals that would prefer to see an article removed from the encyclopedia, but there are also many disappointed people worldwide. I don't consider it wisdom for both you and your wife to essentially brow beat the closing administrator's decision, based on emotional pleas from your friends. Respectfully, it is apparent that there may be a conflict of interest here that you may wish to consider. Again, there are other options available to you. I recommend that you choose one of them. <font color="navy" face="Tahoma">[[User:Cindamuse|Cindy]]</font><font color="purple" face="Courier">([[User talk:Cindamuse#top|talk to me]])</font> 12:04, 5 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
::::::Cindy, I appreciate your loyalty to Sarah, but you and I wouldn't be here if our parents hadn't let their emotions get the better of them at one point in time. Your "dead horse" analogy seems especially cruel in this context. Here's hoping you'll never learn of the death of a loved one via email or google news, and then went on to find a sensationalist article about them on Wikipedia. Neither JN nor I got no conflict of interest here. This is about basic human decency. [[User:DracoEssentialis|Draco]]<sup>[[User talk:DracoEssentialis|E]]</sup> 14:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC) |
::::::Cindy, I appreciate your loyalty to Sarah, but you and I wouldn't be here if our parents hadn't let their emotions get the better of them at one point in time. Your "dead horse" analogy seems especially cruel in this context. Here's hoping you'll never learn of the death of a loved one via email or google news, and then went on to find a sensationalist article about them on Wikipedia. Neither JN nor I got no conflict of interest here. This is about basic human decency. [[User:DracoEssentialis|Draco]]<sup>[[User talk:DracoEssentialis|E]]</sup> 14:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
::::::*You are right. It was highly insensitive of me to relate this discussion to a "dead horse". Please accept my apologies. As a personal note, I actually learned of the suicide of a sibling in a phone call and the murder-suicide of an uncle in an email. In a separate incidence, when my sister was murdered, it was reported in regional and statewide news that I was actually the one that died, rather than my sister. My closest friends mourned my death and it took heaven and earth to get the news media and law officials to correct their mistake. In professional interviews I have given, I have been misquoted and misrepresented in newspaper articles that have been picked up and repeated in international news without retraction. I have personally experienced all sides. (My book is forthcoming.) In regards to my personal emotions, they are not dependent on my parents. Human decency is defined and governed by community standards. I am able to separate my personal feelings and professional expertise from the guidelines and policies that govern our community. In doing so, I am able to carry out responsibilities in an objective manner. When colleagues have asked for my assistance in creating or deleting an article, my first question is one of notability and sourcing to support the same. Outside of that, my personal emotions matter little. I have to question when others disregard consensus (which does not equate to a vote), claiming a loyalty to a friend in an effort to alleviate suffering that an article on Wikipedia brings. At this point, there is an option to review any information that may conflict with that presented in the article. Once this information is made public, we can review independent and reliable sources that may provide balance to any outstanding questions, then add that new information to the article, while retaining or dismissing the current content. Other options include [[WP:DRV]] or a second AFD. There are constructive alternatives available, that none seem to have considered. We need to refocus. My loyalty lays not with Sarah, but with the community. We have a deletion process for a reason. The approach with Sarah has made. I simply recommend following the process to the next logical step. In all though, I sincerely apologize for equating the discussion to a dead horse. Thanks for calling me out on that. Your admonition here is not one I will soon forget. <font color="navy" face="Tahoma">[[User:Cindamuse|Cindy]]</font><font color="purple" face="Courier">([[User talk:Cindamuse#top|talk to me]])</font> 17:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Teahouse talk == |
== Teahouse talk == |
Revision as of 17:09, 5 September 2012
The Drama Llama is Watching You | |
The owner of this page reserves the right to delete trolling and drama at their discretion. |
Some notes on Template:Wikify
Help with Notability requirement
I have been trying to provide enough independent links verifying the information that I have included on the page I am attempting to create, however I am still having problems achieving your notability standards. Any advice would be appreciated.
Chris Par page
What's up with the sudden deletion? I thought someone's edit sufficed, though the full extensive article found after the jump should have deemed more than exceptional. I worked hard on it, and there are no inaccuracies. If you look up 2par, Chris Par, or King Par on your itunes you will find albums, if you google Chris Par for Governor, Mayor, and President articles will show up. Chris Par floatopia the same. How can the bush man, a bum, be more notable than someone whom has done all these things with a much larger internet presence? Please, it is important the public knows the truth about Chris Par. (Bush Man wikipedia passes? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Famous_Bushman ) (Notable Mixtapes too! http://www.datpiff.com/profile/TheChrisParty/mixtapes)
Please put this page back up as is below, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2swag (talk • contribs)
The Lady Magazine
I send an email asking the editor whether they would like to have an article on female Wikipedia editors. Is that the sort of thing you want me to do in promotion? Or shall I wait till you come up with a list of contacts and template we can send out. This is the website[1], did I target the right kind? -- RexRowan Talk 10:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Rex! Thanks for the ping. WWC is undergoing a few changes, about our focus point for phase one - so we're not ready yet to start pinging and calls to action through media, but, I'll let you know for sure when we are, and yes, organizations and websites and magazines like that are totally up our alley! So keep a list going :) SarahStierch (talk) 16:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Category
Hello, Sarah. I see you marked Category:Unassessed Public art articles as not to be deleted. Actually, the reason this category is empty is that the WikiProject template was changed to classify pages into Category:Unassessed Public Art articles, which is populated. I assume you weren't aware of this. You might want to delete the empty category, accordingly. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hey Russ! Ah, I failed to notice the new category. I deleted the old one. Thanks :) SarahStierch (talk) 17:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
For spending two months splitting List of California Historical Landmarks and converting all the 1000+ entries into a table format by hand. Zzyzx11 (talk) 00:55, 2 September 2012 (UTC) |
- She's a tough one, this Ms. Stierch! :)
- Binksternet (talk) 01:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Re: Sorcha Faal
Hello Sarah, can you please review Sorcha Faal as User talk:IRWolfie- and I are not agreeing on how to best improve this entry? The Sorcha Faal entry falls well within the guidlines of Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative Views and even though this "entity" is known, and written about, the world over, it is perplexing, at best, as to how best to document same. Thank you.Arzk02587k (talk) 01:10, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
SarahStierch, Thank you for inviting my students to the Tea House for new Wikipedians! I'll explain more about Tea House in my class. You're doing excellent work in the Wikimedia universe. By the way, we have met at Wikimania 2012 in D.C. and we also interacted with each other through Wikinews. Enjoy your kitten, Chad
Crtew (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Translation notification: Wikimedia Highlights, July 2012
You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to Simple English on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, July 2012 is available for translation. You can translate it here:
- translate to Simple English
The priority of this page is medium.
Note: This time, the "Wikimedia Foundation highlights" section does not include the usual coverage of the most notable work of Foundation staff during that month. Instead, it contains a list of talks given by Foundation staff at Wikimania, summarizing their most important work the year over. It looks like a lot of text, but only the talk titles will need to be translated. The intention is that these titles alone can already give readers a good overview of what the Foundation is working on in general.
You are receiving this message because you signed up to the new translation notification system. Questions about this system can be asked at [2], and you can manage your subscription at [3].
Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.
Thank you!
Meta translation coordinators, 00:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)Project Bolo page submission
Dear Sarah, Thanks you for reviewing my submission "Creating Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Project Bolo" I have received a notice that my submission has been rejected because of copyright materials being used. I am unable to understand which part of the text was copyrighted. I would like to review and redit my submission to remove any copyrighted material. Could you guide me where I can find the article I submitted to edit and correct it, instead of creating a new one. The link above gives a blank page and does not have any of the text, links and references I put in. can you please advise at the earliest. Thanks and regards Sridhar Rangayan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sridhar Rangayan (talk • contribs) 08:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
A Puppy for you! :)
Thanks a lot being a Faithful Companion and a Good Wikifriend :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 10:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello SarahStierch I do not understand why this article submission was declined.Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William E. Ingram, Jr. The sources that are used are official government sources. There are many other articles about General Officers just like this one, citing almost identical official government sources.
Why are these government sources not creditable enough? I've added more sources, but they are again mostly government sources. I'm not sure what kind of sources I could provide that would be more official or crediable.
Please advise. Thank you for your time. --Okanos (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Ben Meiklejohn
Hi there, could you userify Ben Meiklejohn to my talk page? I did not even know the article was up for deletion and I'd like to add more sources to provide for notability. Thanks!--TM 20:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Done I put it here. SarahStierch (talk) 20:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Editor review/TheGeneralUser (2) Your review is required and will be greatly appreciated :)
Hi SarahStierch ! I have started my second editor review at Wikipedia:Editor review/TheGeneralUser (2). I will be greatly delighted, thankful and valued to have your review for me regarding my editing and possible candidate for Adminship. As you are a experienced and long term Wikipedian so i have asked for your kind review. Take your time to review my editing and give the best review that you can :). Feel free to ask me any questions you would like to on the review page itself. It will be a great honor to have you review me for which I will truly feel appreciated and helpful! I always work to improve Wikipedia and make it a more better place to be for Everyone :). Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:27, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Death of Carole Waugh
Hi Sarah, you were the closing admin at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Death_of_Carole_Waugh. I've been contacted today by someone with a personal connection to the victim, who is appalled at our having an article based on press reports that are full of inaccuracies and erroneous speculation [4]. It's a fact of life that press reports on ephemeral cases like this often contain inaccuracies which, due to lack of enduring interest, are never corrected. Now, as I said in my comment on the talk page, by any interpretation of policy this article fails WP:NOT#NEWS by a mile. There is simply no evidence and no likelihood of enduring notability for this murder case (who will talk or write about it in ten years' time?), and the article is causing significant distress. Is there any chance I can get you to reconsider the close? Best, Andreas JN466 01:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hey Jayen! Man, I am really regretting ever getting mixed up with this article. I've had another user absolutely blow his lid about the keeping of the article. It was asked that discussion about it be brought up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Crime or the article talk page. I have to be honest, I don't feel comfortable getting that closely mixed up with the article from this point out. It'd probably be best to seek a different admin or something more higher level. I'm really sorry - I have a feeling if I make one decision or another all hell will break lose and I really don't feel comfortable (as a volunteer and as a Wikimedia Foundation Fellow) moving further with this. Sorry you have been put in this position. SarahStierch (talk) 02:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Sarah, Jayen’s wife here. The person who is suffering from this article being on WP is my friend, too. I’m seeing a lot of “I”s in your reply. How about you forget about your concerns for your Wikimedia career for a minute? Try and imagine what it would feel like if the victim was your sister and you couldn’t bear seeing her remembered this way, awful photograph and all? You assumed responsibility for the article by closing the Afd. Having followed some of the many good things you did for the project, I know you can do better than bow out of this now. Please reconsider. DracoE 10:41, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Sarah's due responsibility as an administrator in closing this AFD was done in accordance with policy in determining consensus. If you disagree with the consensus, the option is not to request the closing administrator to disregard consensus. At this point, I think Sarah has spoken her thoughts rather clearly, so I would recommend a review of the Guide to deletion, which provides a review of the policy process. You may also wish to submit a request for deletion review. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 11:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- AfDs are not decided on numbers; they are not a vote: a closing administrator has to weigh policy-based arguments. WP:NOTNEWSPAPER is fundamental site policy, and applies, in spades. Cindy, you need to understand that an attempt to resolve the situation with the closing admin must precede the initiation any deletion review. I have made more than 40,000 edits here for the past seven years, and I can wikilawyer with the best of them: you may indeed assume that I am well aware of policy. But this is not about wikilawyering; it is about being human. Policy is informed by and represents conscience in this project, and we have to act with conscience, for the benefit of both this project and our fellow human beings. JN466 11:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- You have attempted to resolve the "situation" with Sarah, yet she has not responded in the manner in which you desire. Beating a dead horse here or on the article's talkpage has now gone beyond par. The community has determined in the AFD that the WP:NOTNEWS argument did not hold water in this regard. You have other options here. I'm sure there are thousands of individuals that would prefer to see an article removed from the encyclopedia, but there are also many disappointed people worldwide. I don't consider it wisdom for both you and your wife to essentially brow beat the closing administrator's decision, based on emotional pleas from your friends. Respectfully, it is apparent that there may be a conflict of interest here that you may wish to consider. Again, there are other options available to you. I recommend that you choose one of them. Cindy(talk to me) 12:04, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Cindy, I appreciate your loyalty to Sarah, but you and I wouldn't be here if our parents hadn't let their emotions get the better of them at one point in time. Your "dead horse" analogy seems especially cruel in this context. Here's hoping you'll never learn of the death of a loved one via email or google news, and then went on to find a sensationalist article about them on Wikipedia. Neither JN nor I got no conflict of interest here. This is about basic human decency. DracoE 14:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- You are right. It was highly insensitive of me to relate this discussion to a "dead horse". Please accept my apologies. As a personal note, I actually learned of the suicide of a sibling in a phone call and the murder-suicide of an uncle in an email. In a separate incidence, when my sister was murdered, it was reported in regional and statewide news that I was actually the one that died, rather than my sister. My closest friends mourned my death and it took heaven and earth to get the news media and law officials to correct their mistake. In professional interviews I have given, I have been misquoted and misrepresented in newspaper articles that have been picked up and repeated in international news without retraction. I have personally experienced all sides. (My book is forthcoming.) In regards to my personal emotions, they are not dependent on my parents. Human decency is defined and governed by community standards. I am able to separate my personal feelings and professional expertise from the guidelines and policies that govern our community. In doing so, I am able to carry out responsibilities in an objective manner. When colleagues have asked for my assistance in creating or deleting an article, my first question is one of notability and sourcing to support the same. Outside of that, my personal emotions matter little. I have to question when others disregard consensus (which does not equate to a vote), claiming a loyalty to a friend in an effort to alleviate suffering that an article on Wikipedia brings. At this point, there is an option to review any information that may conflict with that presented in the article. Once this information is made public, we can review independent and reliable sources that may provide balance to any outstanding questions, then add that new information to the article, while retaining or dismissing the current content. Other options include WP:DRV or a second AFD. There are constructive alternatives available, that none seem to have considered. We need to refocus. My loyalty lays not with Sarah, but with the community. We have a deletion process for a reason. The approach with Sarah has made. I simply recommend following the process to the next logical step. In all though, I sincerely apologize for equating the discussion to a dead horse. Thanks for calling me out on that. Your admonition here is not one I will soon forget. Cindy(talk to me) 17:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Cindy, I appreciate your loyalty to Sarah, but you and I wouldn't be here if our parents hadn't let their emotions get the better of them at one point in time. Your "dead horse" analogy seems especially cruel in this context. Here's hoping you'll never learn of the death of a loved one via email or google news, and then went on to find a sensationalist article about them on Wikipedia. Neither JN nor I got no conflict of interest here. This is about basic human decency. DracoE 14:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Sarah's due responsibility as an administrator in closing this AFD was done in accordance with policy in determining consensus. If you disagree with the consensus, the option is not to request the closing administrator to disregard consensus. At this point, I think Sarah has spoken her thoughts rather clearly, so I would recommend a review of the Guide to deletion, which provides a review of the policy process. You may also wish to submit a request for deletion review. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 11:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Sarah, Jayen’s wife here. The person who is suffering from this article being on WP is my friend, too. I’m seeing a lot of “I”s in your reply. How about you forget about your concerns for your Wikimedia career for a minute? Try and imagine what it would feel like if the victim was your sister and you couldn’t bear seeing her remembered this way, awful photograph and all? You assumed responsibility for the article by closing the Afd. Having followed some of the many good things you did for the project, I know you can do better than bow out of this now. Please reconsider. DracoE 10:41, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Teahouse talk
Hi Sarah. I've been asked to give a talk to a group of librarians in a couple of weeks about Wikipedia, with a particular emphasis on how to get involved. The organiser has asked me to raise the Teahouse, so I thought I'd check with you if there was anything in particular you normally cover in regard to the Teahouse that I should make sure to mention. :) It should be a good opportunity - they've already asked about meetups, so it is looking really promising, and I suspect they would be great contributors. - Bilby (talk) 01:30, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Irishtown, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Mortar, Mine and Pine Grove, California
- California Historical Landmarks in El Dorado County, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Cedar Grove, California and Gold Hill, California
- California Historical Landmarks in Placer County, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Squaw Valley, California and Soda Springs, California
- Butte City, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Calaveras
- California Historical Landmarks in Nevada County, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Wolf Creek Bridge
- California Historical Landmarks in San Luis Obispo County, California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to San Miguel, California
- Native Daughters of the Golden West (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Ursula
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)